On 10/03/2010 14:57, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
> Stephan Bergmann wrote:
>>> * use of fundamental types like long and int.
>>>
>>> Whereas I think the former is quite sensible (also the added
>>> SAL_NO_VTABLE), I have some issues with the latter. Are there any
>>> reasons _in favor_ of that, except for platform apis & the
>>> occasional loop counter?
>> Yes: different semantics.
>>
>> On the one hand:
>>
>> [bunch of good examples snipped]
>>
> Hi Stephan,
> 
> sure, I buy those. Would then be worthwhile to re-def the types you
> listed in terms of their C/std:: counterparts. Can do that.
> sal_sChar is indeed unused, sal_uChar not so much (but there should
> be a trivial 1:1 mapping). 
> 
> Or better even, mass-move things like sal_Size/PtrDiff over to
> size_t etc.

hmm... and what about this crapfest:
/tools/inc/tools/solar.h

uhm... typedef int FASTBOOL ?  seriously?

regards, michael

-- 
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to